A Zimbabwean man based in South Africa, Shepherd Chipatiko, is demanding the return of approximately R1.6 million (US$91,000) that he spent on lobola (bride price) and marriage celebrations after his short-lived marriage to Varaidzo Marylyn Kunze collapsed in December 2023.
In addition to seeking the reimbursement of these substantial marital expenses, Chipatiko is also suing his ex-wife for R15,000, claiming that she had peddled falsehoods against him.
Furthermore, he has offered a R10,000 reward to anyone who can provide information on Varaidzo’s current whereabouts.
Chipatiko claimed that during their brief marriage, Varaidzo even suggested that he should marry her daughter, Thando Sibanda, an offer which he ultimately declined. He said:
<blockquote>
I now want her to refund me the lobola payment and celebrations amounting to R755 000, posh car for R385 000, Bitcoin loan of R100 000.
She made a misrepresentation of a fake pregnancy, R320 000, age misrepresentation, and about having one child when she has two kids. I also want R15 000 for defamation of character.
We separated last year in December and I gave her R188 000 to start her life after lying to me several times.
She lied that she was pregnant and she was dating someone here in SA.
She was weighing on who to stay with and I engaged the guy who also said she was a fraudster.
This woman lied about her age that she is 38 yet she was 48 and even promised to give me her daughter, who is 25 years.
She promised to destroy my reputation.
</blockquote>
Chipatiko’s legal representatives, the law firm Kevin James McCallum Attorneys, have taken additional steps in his pursuit of recouping the substantial financial investments he made into his short-lived marriage to Varaidzo.
In a formal letter dated 05 July 2024, Chipatiko’s lawyers have demanded that Varaidzo remove all defamatory social media posts she has made, which they argue have tarnished their client’s reputation.
Additionally, the lawyers have formally requested that Varaidzo repay the money Chipatiko spent on the customary marriage celebrations, including the lobola payment. The lawyers wrote:
<blockquote>
Removal of all your defamatory social media posts, a retraction statement to be issued to all the media outlets that you have contacted or been contacted whereby you defame our client and/or his wife, a formal public apology to be shared on every and all social media platforms you took to, to defame our client and/or his wife in the first place.
Repayment of the sum of R100 000 lent to you by our client aforementioned, repayment in the sum of R1 655 000 paid by our client for the customary marriage celebrations and lobola into which he would never have entered had it not been for your outrageous misrepresentations.
Payment in the sum of R15 000 for defamation of character as our client has suffered irreparable damages to his good standing, character, reputation, and loss of income incurred as a direct result of your spurious and vexatious defamatory mistruths shared about our client.
</blockquote>
More: <a href="https://www.pindula.co.zw/">Pindula News</a>

Pindula News

Zimbabwean Man Seeks Refund Of R1.6 Million Lobola And After Party Costs From Ex-Wife

The Mutare Magistrates Civil Court has dismissed an application for a lobola refund by an aggrieved bridegroom.
<a href="https://www.manicapost.co.zw/court-quashes-mans-lobola-refund-bid/">The Manica Post</a> reported that Eddington Machingauta had dragged his in-laws, Godwin Madenga and Betty Gombarume, as well as his estranged flame, Patricia Chantelle Madenga to the court, demanding restitution of US$4 240 which he claimed to have paid as bride price.
Machingauta was represented by Makuwaza &amp; Magogo Attorneys, while the defendants were represented by Chris Ndlovu of Gonese and Ndlovu Legal Practitioners.
Madenga dismissed the claim that Machingauta paid US$4 240 as bride price saying he only paid US$500 towards lobola, with the other payments “not constituting lobola perse”.
Presiding magistrate, Priscilla Gumbo dismissed Machingauta’s application saying his motives were not clear. Ruled the magistrate:
<blockquote>
It is still unclear why you decided to lay dormant after paying lobola and only decided to resurface demanding a refund of the lobola.
This raises questions on whether the applicant wanted his wife or if it was all a sham.
My belief is the applicant would have taken the necessary actions to have his wife back if he truly wanted the marriage to subsist.
</blockquote>
Gumbo ruled that Machingauta is not entitled to a refund since the marriage was never dissolved as he did not offer his wife a divorce token “gupuro”.
Allegations were that on 09 August, Machingauta visited his in-laws at their Pegasus house in Dangamvura in the company of his family to set a date for lobola payment and was given a bride price list with a total of US$11 240.
Machingauta only managed to pay US$3 690 and groceries worth US$550, making it a total of US$4 240.
After receiving the lobola, the bride’s parents refused to hand over their daughter to Machingauta as they insisted that he needed to top up the money.
Between August and October, Machingauta and Patricia’s relationship turned sour, prompting the woman to change her mind and opt out of the marriage.
Machingauta said that he tried to negotiate with his in-laws so that they could either restitute his money and groceries or give him his wife, all to no avail.
However, the father-in-law said Machingauta was called to come and take his wife, but he refused to do so.
The defendants’ attorney, Ndlovu, argued that lobola is a customary law practice and tradition, but the complainant had sued his clients under general law and not under customary law.
He said Machingauta should go through proper channels to solve the matter.
The lawyer further argued that lobola is a transaction between a son-in-law and his father-in-law, hence Machingauta cannot sue his mother-in-law and his estranged wife.
More: <a href="https://www.pindula.co.zw/">Pindula News</a>

Lobola Latest News

Latest Jobs